E. Thébault
Institut de Physique du Globe de Paris
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by E. Thébault.
Earth, Planets and Space | 2013
Nils Olsen; Eigil Friis-Christensen; Rune Floberghagen; Patrick Alken; Ciaran Beggan; Arnaud Chulliat; Eelco Doornbos; Joao Encarnacao; Brian Hamilton; Gauthier Hulot; Jose van den IJssel; Alexey Kuvshinov; Vincent Lesur; H. Lühr; Susan Macmillan; Stefan Maus; Max Noja; Poul Erik Holmdahl Olsen; Jaeheung Park; Gernot Plank; Christoph Püthe; Jan Rauberg; Patricia Ritter; Martin Rother; Terence J. Sabaka; Reyko Schachtschneider; Olivier Sirol; Claudia Stolle; E. Thébault; Alan Thomson
Swarm, a three-satellite constellation to study the dynamics of the Earth’s magnetic field and its interactions with the Earth system, is expected to be launched in late 2013. The objective of the Swarm mission is to provide the best ever survey of the geomagnetic field and its temporal evolution, in order to gain new insights into the Earth system by improving our understanding of the Earth’s interior and environment. In order to derive advanced models of the geomagnetic field (and other higher-level data products) it is necessary to take explicit advantage of the constellation aspect of Swarm. The Swarm SCARF (SatelliteConstellationApplication andResearchFacility) has been established with the goal of deriving Level-2 products by combination of data from the three satellites, and of the various instruments. The present paper describes the Swarm input data products (Level-1b and auxiliary data) used by SCARF, the various processing chains of SCARF, and the Level-2 output data products determined by SCARF.
Geochemistry Geophysics Geosystems | 2007
M. Hamoudi; E. Thébault; V. Lesur; M. Mandea
The World Digital Magnetic Anomaly Map (WDMAM) is an ongoing effort toward the mapping of worldwide available aeromagnetic data. It is led by a task force of the International Association for Geomagnetism and Aeronomy (IAGA) and aims at distributing a global map in printed and digital forms. In this paper, we describe in detail our candidate model which has to be evaluated by the IAGA task force together with five other candidate maps. After discussing the quality of the available data, we show a simple but effective method applied to successfully process, reduce, and merge together individual compilations. The near-surface data are corrected using global field models and further refined with two-dimensional polynomial corrections. After the upward continuation to 5 km altitude, data are resampled to a 3 minute grid and merged together. We then calculate a spherical harmonic model up to degree 199 and analyze the magnetic spectrum of the global map. This helps us to confirm that wavelengths larger than 400 km are spurious at a global scale in aeromagnetic compilations. Therefore we substitute them using a satellite-based lithospheric field model (MF5) to degree 100. Finally, our proposed candidate map for WDMAM is presented.
Geochemistry Geophysics Geosystems | 2008
E. Thébault; Luis R. Gaya-Pique
Spherical cap harmonic analysis (SCHA) has become a common tool for the regional modeling of potential fields since its introduction by Haines (1985). The fact that SCHA satisfies Laplace equation and the possibility of representing high-frequency fields with a small number of coefficients (compared to the global spherical harmonic analysis) made SCHA the preferred choice for the development, for example, of magnetic field models at national scale. However, Thebault et al. (2006a) demonstrated that the traditional SCHA presented some deficiencies, in particular related to the inversion of multilevel data sets. The authors presented the R-SCHA technique as an alternative method in which the introduction of a new set of basis functions and boundary conditions solved this issue. In this paper we present some numerical comparisons between the SCHA and R-SCHA techniques applied with different synthetic vector data sets, from near-surface main field, main difference, and crustal field data simulating a World Digital Magnetic Anomaly Map subset. Other analyses are carried out with synthetic vector data set that mimics the expected data distribution from a multisatellite mission like the forthcoming European Swarm mission. No regularization, weighting, or ad hoc procedures are applied to the synthetic vector data, and a cap of 7° aperture is considered. The numerical analyses show that SCHA is a satisfying approximation in a band-limited spectral region that depends on the caps size. It does not work correctly either for main field or for the short-scale crustal field modeling. These aspects are supported by equations illustrating why SCHA may fail. On the contrary, R-SCHA converges more slowly than SCHA but is valid in all cases. It gives a consistent set of regional coefficients and fits the radial variation of the field in a realistic way. At last, the special case of data incompatibility shows that R-SCHA does not fit incompatible data while SCHA assimilates most of them. These results should help the scientific community to evaluate the level of approximation needed for the development of regional magnetic field models in the era of the European Space Agency Swarm mission.
Geophysical Journal International | 2010
Christopher C. Finlay; Stefan Maus; Ciaran Beggan; T. N. Bondar; Aude Chambodut; T. A. Chernova; Arnaud Chulliat; V. Golovkov; Brian Hamilton; Mohamed Hamoudi; Richard Holme; Gauthier Hulot; Weijia Kuang; Benoit Langlais; Vincent Lesur; F. J. Lowes; H. Lühr; Susan Macmillan; Mioara Mandea; S. Mclean; C. Manoj; Michel Menvielle; Ingo Michaelis; Nils Olsen; Jan Rauberg; Martin Rother; Terence J. Sabaka; Andrew Tangborn; Lars Tøffner-Clausen; E. Thébault
Geochemistry Geophysics Geosystems | 2009
Stefan Maus; Udo Barckhausen; H. Berkenbosch; Nasreddine Bournas; J. Brozena; V. Childers; F. Dostaler; J.D. Fairhead; Carol A. Finn; R. R. B. von Frese; Carmen Gaina; S. Golynsky; R. Kucks; H. Lühr; Peter Milligan; Saad Mogren; R. D. Müller; Odleiv Olesen; Mark Pilkington; Richard W. Saltus; Bernd Schreckenberger; E. Thébault; F. Caratori Tontini
Journal of Geophysical Research | 2006
E. Thébault; J. J. Schott; Mioara Mandea
Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors | 2013
Alexis Licht; Gauthier Hulot; Yves Gallet; E. Thébault
Geophysical Research Letters | 2010
Arnaud Chulliat; E. Thébault; Gauthier Hulot
Earth and Planetary Science Letters | 2007
E. Thébault; Mioara Mandea; Dhananjay Ravat; Stefan Maus
Geochemistry Geophysics Geosystems | 2013
Agnès Genevey; Yves Gallet; E. Thébault; Sébastien Jesset; M. Le Goff